Juries

Question 1

Juries

Answer 1

• juries have been used in the legal systems for over 1,000 years. Originally there were used for providing local knowledge and information, and acted more as witnesses than decision makers. By the middle of the fifteenth century juries had become indecent assessors and assumed their modern role as deciders of fact

Question 2

Independence of the jury and juries in criminal cases

Answer 2

• in mist cases, we have had the right to trail by jury since at least the Middle Ages
• the independence of the jury has been established since at least bushell (1670). A more modern example of the independence of the jury is McKenna (1960)
• crown court juries have 12 members. Only about 2% of criminal cases are heard in the crown court as the vast majority of the rest are dealt with in the magistrates courts where no jury is used
• defendants in the mags have the right to a full trial by jury in the crown court is they wish

Question 3

Jury qualifications

Answer 3

• jurors are randomly selected from the electoral register. Any one listed on the electoral register may require serving as a juror provided that all the requirements are complied with
• under the juries act 1974, to qualify for jury service, a person must be:
• between the ages of 18 and 75
• registered to vote in parliamentary or local government elections
• a registered British or Irish citizen in the uk, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man for at least 5 years since their 13th birthday

Question 4

Jury disqualifications

Answer 4

• people serving life sentences
• detention during her majesty’s pleasure
• imprisonment for public protection
• an extend sentence
• a term of imprisonment for 5 years to more years

You can be disqualified for 10 years if you have:
- served a sentence of imprisonment
- had a suspended sentence
- had a community order

Question 5

Juries and mentally disorder persons

Answer 5

• those suffering from a metal illness who have been hospitalised or are attending treatment
• a person under guardianship under section 7 of the mental health act 1983
• a person determined by a judge as being incapable of administering their property or affairs

Question 6

Juries and lawyers and police officers

Answer 6

• since the criminal justice act 2003, judges lawyers and police are now allowed to serve on juries. Some feel this might lead to bias

Question 7

When can you be excused from jury service? Discretionary excusals

Answer 7

• members of the serving forces
• those to ill to attend, or with a disability
• mothers with young babies
• people with business appointments
• people who have booked holidays
• most of these will have their jury service deferred to a later date, but a non attendance with no reason can incur up to a £1,000 fine

Question 8

Lack of capacity and deaf jurors

Answer 8

• blindness or lack of English language ability does not automatically disqualify a juror, however if the judge believes that this might hinder that jurors ability to fully participate in the jury, he may discharge them
• deaf jurors, who would need a sign language interpreter cannot sit on a jury since a thirteenth person is not permitted in the jury room

Question 9

Selecting a jury - vetting and challenging selection

Answer 9

• vetting and routine police checks on a jury are not standard procedure, but can be requested by either the defence or the prosecution
• routine police checks. R v crown court at Sheffield, the court of appeal held that police checks where an invasion of privacy, but un r v mason, they permitted them stating that since it was a criminal offence to serve on a jury with a criminal conviction, the police were only doing their duty in preventing crime
• vetting a jurors background can also be taken into account if there is a potential conflict of interests - e.g, national security or terrorist cases
• selection at court. 12 are chosen at random out of 15
• challenging. Both prosecution and defence have certain rights to challenge one or more of the jurors before they are sworn in
• to the array - s5 juries act. A challenge to the whole jury on the basis that it hasn’t been chosen in a representative way r v ford
• for the cause - when the right of an individual juror can be challenged, for instance if they have been disqualified or are related to witness of the defendant
• prosecution right to stand by jurors - only the prosecution can use this. One juror can be put to the end of the list and will only be used if there are not enough jurors. No reason needs to be given. Can only be used sparingly

Question 10

The jury’s role in criminal cases - split functions

Answer 10

• where the judge decides points of law and the jury, the facts. The judge can direct the jury, but their decision on guilt or innocence is final, and they do not have to give reasons why
• the jury’s decision is made in private
• if the judge believes there is insufficient prosecution evidence in law to allow the case to continue, he can direct the jury to find the defendant not guilty

Question 11

The juries role in criminal cases - majority verdicts

Answer 11

• although unanimous verdicts are usually preferred, if at leats 2 hours have passed, the judge can call the jury back in and accept a majority verdict
• the majority verdict was introduced to prevent jury ‘nobbling’ when decision had to be unanimous, all it would take would be for one juror to be bribed to cause a stalemate
• majority verdicts state that a 10:2 or 11:1 majority is allows on a full jury of 12, anything less can only one can dissent
• s 17(3) of the juries act 1974 states that the foreman of the jury must announce the numbers on a majority verdict
• about 20% of convictions each year are made by majorty verdict

Question 12

Secrecy

Answer 12

• jury discussion take place in secret
• there can be no inquiry into how the jury reached its verdict
• the criminal justice and courts act 2015 makes it a criminal offence to intentionally disclose what was discussed, although in cases of reporting jurors misconduct, disclosure is permitted
• the same act also gives the judge the power to ask the jurors to hand in their mobile phones and devices
• if this order is disobeyed, a juror matters find themsleves in contempt of court

Question 13

Advantages of using juries

Answer 13

1. Public confidence
2. Jury equity
3. Open system of justice
4. Secrecy of the jury room
5. Impartiality

Question 14

Public confidence

Answer 14

• the right to be tried by ones peers is a bastion of liberty against the state and has been supported by eminent judges. E.g, lord devein said juries are the ‘lamp that shows freedom lives’. The traction of trial by jury is very old and people seem to have confidence in the impartiality and fairness of a jury trial

Question 15

Jury equity

Answer 15

• since they are not legal experts, they are not bound to follow precedent of past cases or even acts of parliament, and do not have to give reasons for their verdict, it is possible for them to decide cases on their idea of ‘fairness’. Several cases have shown the importance of this - postings cases

Question 16

Open system of justice

Answer 16

• the use of a jury is viewed as making the legal system more open. Justice is seen to be done as members of the public are invloved in a key role and the whole process is public. It also helps to keep the law clearer as points have to be explained to the jury, enabling the defendant to understand the case more easily

Question 17

Secrecy of the jury room

Answer 17

• this can be seen as an advantage, since the jury is free from pressure in its discussion. Jurors are protected from outside influences when deciding on the verdict. This allows juries to bring in verdicts that match be unpopular with the public as well as allowing jurors the freedom to ignore the strict letter of the law. It has been suggest that people would be less willing to serve on a jury if they knew that their discussion could be made public

Question 18

Impartiality

Answer 18

• a jury should be impartial as it is not connected to anyone in the case. The process of random selection should result in a cross section of society and this should also lead to an impartial jury, as the jurors will have different prejudices and so should cancel out each others biases. No one individual person is responsible for the decision. A jury is also not case hardened since it sits for only two weeks and is unlikely to try more than there or four cases in that time

Question 19

Disadvantages of jury trial

Answer 19

1. Perverse decisions
2. Secrecy
3. Exceptions
4. Jurors and the internet
5. Racial bias
6. Media influence
7. Lack of understanding
8. Fraud trials
9. Jury tampering
10. High acquittal rates

Question 20

Perverse decisions

Answer 20

• in the case of refusals of the jury to convict might be seen as a fair decision, how we in some circumstances this type of decision can be seen as a perverse decision - that is one which ignores the evidence and gives the wrong decision e.g, R v randle and pottle

Question 21

Secrecy

Answer 21

• secret of the jury room is also a disadvantage because as no reasons have to be given for the verdict, there is no way of knowing id the jury understood the case and came to the decision for the right reasons. R v mirza

Question 22

Expectations

Answer 22

• there are two expectations where the courts will inquire into the conduct of the jury in coming to its verdict. The first is where there has been a complete repudiation of the oath taken by the jurors to try the case according to the evidence. In other words, they have used another method to make their decision